DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Examiner acknowledges that the instant application is a National Stage Application under 35 U.S.C. 371 with relation to PCT Application No. KR2021/016126, filed 11/08/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 9/19/2024 is being considered by the Examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/31/2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 10/31/2025 is acknowledged.
Status of Claims
Applicant’s communications filed on 5/08/2024 and 10/31/2025 have been considered.
Claims 1-12 are currently pending.
Claims 8-12 have been withdrawn.
Claims 1-7 have been examined.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “a personalized content provision part,” “a search tool,” “an editing part,” “an editing tool,” “a purchase part,” “a purchase tool” and “a consumer information management part” in claim 1, “an uploading part,” “an uploading tool,” “a matching information provision part” and “a provider information management part” in claim 5, and “a charging part” in claim 6. The structural modifiers of “personalized content provision,” “editing,” “purchase,” “consumer information management” and “charging” do not denote sufficient structure. Furthermore, although the claimed parts are linked to “a content transaction platform,” the claimed platform does not provide sufficient structure.
Because these claim limitation(s) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 1, claim elements “a personalized content provision part,” “a search tool,” “an editing part,” “an editing tool,” “a purchase part,” “a purchase tool” and “a consumer information management part” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. (See Specification, [0036][0045][0049-0050][0052][0054][0056-0058]). For example, although it is disclosed that the content transaction platform includes a personalized content provision part configured to provide a search tool, a consumer information part, a purchase part configured to provide a purchase tool, and an editing part configured to provide an editing tool, there is no corresponding structure or equivalent thereof disclosed for these claimed “parts” or “tools”. Furthermore, while it is disclosed that the content transaction platform may be a server, it is unclear if the personalized content provision part, search tool, editing part, editing tool, purchase part, purchase tool and consumer information management part are implemented via software or hardware. Accordingly, the claim limitations fail to comply with the written description requirement.
Regarding Claim 5, claim elements “an uploading part,” “an uploading tool,” “a matching information provision part” and “a provider information management part” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. (See Specification, [0036][0045][0062][0064-0065]). For example, although it is disclosed that the content transaction platform includes a provider information management part, uploading part configured to provide an uploading tool, and a provider information management part, there is no corresponding structure or equivalent thereof disclosed for these claimed “parts” or “tool”. Furthermore, while it is disclosed that the content transaction platform may be a server, it is unclear if the provider information management part, uploading part, uploading tool and provider information management part are implemented via software or hardware. Accordingly, the claim limitations fail to comply with the written description requirement.
Regarding Claim 6, claim element “a charging part” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. (See Specification, [0036][0045][0076]). For example, although it is disclosed that the content transaction platform includes a charging part, there is no corresponding structure or equivalent thereof disclosed for the claimed “part”. Furthermore, while it is disclosed that the content transaction platform may be a server, it is unclear if the charging part is implemented via software or hardware. Accordingly, the claim limitations fail to comply with the written description requirement.
Dependent claims 2-4 and 7 depend from claim 1, and inherit the rejection as discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 1, claim elements “a personalized content provision part,” “a search tool,” “an editing part,” “an editing tool,” “a purchase part,” “a purchase tool” and “a consumer information management part” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, it is unclear what the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function include and how to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. For example, in Applicant’s specification ([0036][0045][0049-0050][0052][0054][0056-0058]), it is disclosed that the personalized content provision part providing the search tool, editing part providing the editing tool, purchase part providing the purchase tool and consumer information management part are included in the content transaction platform, which may comprise a server, but it is unclear whether or not the claimed parts and tools, which are linked to the content transaction platform, correspond to the server as well, or are implemented via software. Therefore, these claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Examiner notes that the units have been interpreted to be software operating on hardware.
Regarding Claim 5, claim elements “an uploading part,” “an uploading tool,” “a matching information provision part” and “a provider information management part” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, it is unclear what the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function include and how to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. For example, in Applicant’s specification ([0036][0045][0062][0064-0065]), it is disclosed that the uploading part providing the uploading tool, matching information provision part, and provider information management part are included in the content transaction platform, which may comprise a server, but it is unclear whether or not the claimed parts and tool, which are linked to the content transaction platform, correspond to the server as well, or are implemented via software. Therefore, these claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Examiner notes that the units have been interpreted to be software operating on hardware.
Regarding Claim 6, claim element “a charging part” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, it is unclear what the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function include and how to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. For example, in Applicant’s specification ([0036][0045][0076]), it is disclosed that the charging part is included in the content transaction platform, which may comprise a server, but it is unclear whether or not the claimed part, which is linked to the content transaction platform, corresponds to the server as well, or is implemented via software. Therefore, these claims are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Examiner notes that the unit has been interpreted to be software operating on hardware.
Dependent claims 2-4 and 7 depend from claim 1, and inherit the rejection as discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite an abstract idea. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Under Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test for Products and Processes, the claims must be directed to one of the four statutory categories. See MPEP 2106.03. Claims 1-7 are directed towards a machine. Therefore, claims 1-7 are directed to one of the four statutory categories (Step 1: YES, regarding claims 1-7).
Under Step 2A of the MPEP, it is determined whether the claims are directed to a judicially recognized exception. See MPEP 2106.04. Step 2A is a two-prong inquiry.
Under Prong 1, it is determined whether the claim recites a judicial exception. In determining whether the claims are directed to a judicial exception, the claims are analyzed to evaluate whether the claims recite a judicial exception.
Taking Claim 1 as representative, claim 1 recites limitations that fall within the certain methods of organizing human activity groupings of abstract ideas, including:
a content source configured to store and manage contents provided by a plurality of content providers;
provide for a consumer to search, purchase, and edit the contents;
provide a search tool, select one or a plurality of personalized contents among the contents of the content source using consumer pattern information in associated with the consumer’s search using the search tool, and provide the selected personalized content to the consumer;
provide an editing tool, generated an edited content through the consumer’s editing of the personalized content using the editing tool, and provide the edited content to the consumer;
provide a purchase tool, and provide purchase decision information including payment information in associated with the consumer’s purchase of the personalized content or the edited content using the purchase tool; and
generate the consumer pattern information by collecting and analyzing the consumer’s behaviors for the search through the consumer interface part and the consumer’s interest levels in the contents provided through the search tool, and manage purchase information corresponding to the purchase decision information.
Claim 1, as exemplary, recites the abstract idea of marketing and customizing products. These recited limitations fall within the "Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities" Grouping of abstract ideas as it relates to commercial interactions of sales activities or behaviors. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.04.
Accordingly, under Prong One of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, claim 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Under Prong 2, it is determined whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception.
Claim 1 recites additional elements beyond the judicial exception(s), including A content transaction platform, comprising; contents uploaded by content providers; a consumer interface part configured to provide a consumer interface page through the Internet, the consumer interface page forming an interface; a personalized content provision part; an editing part; a purchase part; and a consumer information management part.
These additional elements are described at a high level in Applicant’s specification without any meaningful detail about their structure or configuration. As such, these computer-related limitations are not found to be sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Claim 1 specifying that the abstract idea of marketing and customizing products is executed in a computer environment merely indicates a field of use in which to apply the abstract idea because this requirement merely limits the claims to the computer field, i.e., to execution on a generic computer. As such, under Prong Two of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, when considered both individually and as a whole, the limitations of claim 1 are not indicative of integration into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO).
Since claim 1 recites an abstract idea and fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, claim 1 is “directed to” an abstract idea (Step 2A: YES). Accordingly, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Next, under Step 2B, the instant claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as discussed above, the additional elements of A content transaction platform, comprising; contents uploaded by content providers; a consumer interface part configured to provide a consumer interface page through the Internet, the consumer interface page forming an interface; a personalized content provision part; an editing part; a purchase part; and a consumer information management part amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. For the same reason these elements are not sufficient to provide an inventive concept. Therefore when considering the additional elements alone, and in combination, there is no inventive concept in the claim, and thus the claim is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO).
Dependent claims 2-7, when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they do not add “significantly more” to the abstract idea. As for dependent claims 2 and 7, these claims recite limitations that further define the same abstract idea noted in independent claim 1, and do not recite any additional elements other than what is disclosed in independent claim 1. Therefore, claims 2 and 7 are considered patent ineligible for the reasons given above.
As for dependent claims 3-6, these claims recite limitations that further define the abstract idea noted in independent claim 1. Additionally, they recite the following additional limitations:
perform charging processing on the purchase decision information;
wherein the editing part is configured to upload the editing content;
a provider interface part configured to provide a provider interface page through the Internet, the provider interface page forming an interface for the content provider to upload the content;
an uploading part configured to provide an uploading tool, the uploading tool uploading the content… in response to an upload request;
a matching information provision part configured;
a provider information management part configured to… manage uploading information; and
a charging part configured to perform charging processing.
The additional elements of performing charging processing, uploading the editing content; a provider interface part configured to provide a provider interface page through the Internet, the provider interface page forming an interface; an uploading part configured to provide an uploading tool in response to an upload request, a matching information provision part, a provider information management part, and a charging part are all recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than instructions to apply the judicial exception in a generic technological environment. Even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, under the Alice/Mayo test, claims 1-7 are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of U.S Patent Application No. 2012/0109777 A1 to Lipsitz et al., hereinafter Lipsitz, in view of U.S Patent Application No. 2022/0122144 A1 to Papale, III et al., hereinafter Papale.
Regarding Claim 1, Lipsitz discloses A content transaction platform, comprising ( [0091] In the Store, Users may view, share, save, customize, buy (10) and sell (11) existing finished Products; [0095] a custom Product generator which includes the ability for Users to set up Sub-Stores and Sub-Customizers to sell custom goods… see [0088] This online interface can be accessed by any personal computer or electronic device that connects to and displays from the Internet or similar communications network):
a content source configured to store and manage contents uploaded by a plurality of content providers ([0089] Company Operators (backend) input data into a centralized Database regarding the components that users can combine to create a finished product; [0097] in the case of a Base garment, the Operator would select the select the Supplier of the garment, the Base Type, and the Category; [0098] for each Base, the Operator will upload a file; [0099] the operator can select to make the Base active on the front end immediately);
a consumer interface part configured to provide a consumer interface page through the Internet, the consumer interface page forming an interface for a consumer to search, purchase, and edit the contents ([0088] The managing Company (2) and all Users (3) of the system interact with the database via an Internet connection (4) and a central Company Website (5)… this online interface can be accessed by any electronic device that connects to and displays from the Internet; [0091] In the Store, Users may view, share, save, customize, buy (10) and sell (11) existing finished Products… the database generates filters for Users to easily navigate and search the finished Products in the Store);
a personalized content provision part configured to provide a search tool, select one or a plurality of personalized contents among the contents of the content source using consumer pattern information in association with the consumer’s search using the search tool, and provide the selected personalized content to the consumer interface part ([0091] Users can view all finished products, including those created by Operators… the database generates filters for Users to easily navigate and search the finished Products in the Store; [0108] a front end Store has a grid of products and two systems for filtering products; [0110] When Users select items from either filter the Product results narrow down to match the criteria selected; [0111] the User can select from several options in the Store page… the User can click on a Product Image (62) to see the Product Detail Page; [Fig. 9] Product Detail Page) (Examiner notes that user selections of filters an options presented within a Store page in order to arrive at a desired product reads on the consumer’s pattern of filtering selections);
an editing part configured to provide an editing tool, generate an edited content through the consumer’s editing of the personalized content using the editing tool, and provide the edited content to the consumer interface part ([0111] By selecting Customize it (77), the database system redirects the User to the Customizer which loads all the Components of the Product. The User then can change any element; [0090] the database generates an overarching front end Customizer(8) where Users can select different features to personalize and customize pre-produced Bases into finished Products; [0092] Users may choose to customize a finished Product by altering the Components that make up the finished Product in the Customizer);
a purchase part configured to provide a purchase tool, and provide purchase decision information including payment information in association with the consumer’s purchase of the personalized content or the edited content using the purchase tool ([0111] the User can select Buy it (10) to go through a Checkout (12) to complete his/her purchase, thereby turning the User into a customer; [0130] Orders automatically flow into the Order Management system from the database when Customers purchase Products. Customers are then automatically sent an email with confirmation of a successful transaction and the expected date of arrival for their Orders; [0131] The Operator can then receive a Purchase Order); and
a consumer information management part configured to collect and analyze the consumer’s behaviors for the search through the consumer interface part ([0091] Users can view all finished products, including those created by Operators… the database generates filters for Users to easily navigate and search the finished Products in the Store; [0108] a front end Store has a grid of products and two systems for filtering products; [0110] When Users select items from either filter the Product results narrow down to match the criteria selected; [0111] the User can select from several options in the Store page… the User can click on a Product Image (62) to see the Product Detail Page; [Fig. 9] Product Detail Page) (Examiner notes that the selection of filtering options has been interpreted as a behavior), and
manage purchase information corresponding to the purchase decision information ([0111] the User can select Buy it (10) to add the Product to a shopping cart and continue shopping or go through a Checkout (12) to complete his/her purchase, thereby turning a User into a Customer; [0124] The Order (116) is a visual way to see the progression of a Customer's purchase of Products (Order) from the time an Order is placed on the website to the time the Order is delivered to the Customer; [0130] Orders automatically flow into the Order Management system from the database when Customers purchase Products; [0131] Operators can receive Purchase Orders listing pertinent information);
But does not explicitly disclose generate the consumer pattern information by collecting and analyzing the consumer’s interest levels in the contents provided through the search tool.
Papale, on the other hand, discloses generate the consumer pattern information by collecting and analyzing the consumer’s interest levels in the contents provided through the search tool ([0080] automatically configuring custom product options for a customized product based on user interactions with a computer-based product customization marketplace; [0081] The automatically recorded paths and choices made by the user are used to generate, so called, triggers; [0082] additional triggers are generated based on collected information about the user including the user’s preferences and search history… see [0080] the user interface may be configured to provide multi-facet search capabilities and provide templates for product customization options).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system, as taught by Lipsitz, generate the consumer pattern information by collecting and analyzing the consumer’s interest levels in the contents provided through the search tool, as taught by Papale, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lipsitz, to include the teachings of Papale, in order to generate more accurate options for customizing products based on tracked user actions (Papale, [0003]).
Regarding Claim 2, Lipsitz and Papale teach the limitations of claim 1.
Lipsitz further discloses wherein the consumer information management part is configured to analyze the behaviors of the consumer for the search ([0091] Users can view all finished products, including those created by Operators… the database generates filters for Users to easily navigate and search the finished Products in the Store; [0108] a front end Store has a grid of products and two systems for filtering products; [0110] When Users select items from either filter the Product results narrow down to match the criteria selected);
But does not explicitly disclose analyzing the interest levels of the consumer by collecting previously collected interest fields of the consumer, keywords used by the consumer for the search, and categories and information of the contents read by the consumer.
Papale, on the other hand, discloses analyzing the interest levels of the consumer by collecting previously collected interest fields of the consumer, keywords used by the consumer for the search, and categories and information of the contents read by the consumer ([0089] the body of knowledge about the user and the products that the user is interested in is used to automatically generate, so called, triggers; [0091] the trigger may be tied to previous user actions, including the user searching for and visiting a product category for printed invitations; [0092] triggers include indicators that a product category was visited, and that particular search terms were used… see [0148] discussing a Search Term trigger; [0155-0156] user selections are noted, and records are created to indicate the user’s interest in the selection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system, as taught by Lipsitz, analyzing the interest levels of the consumer by collecting previously collected interest fields of the consumer, keywords used by the consumer for the search, and categories and information of the contents read by the consumer, as taught by Papale, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 3, Lipsitz and Papale teach the limitations of claim 1.
Lipsitz further discloses wherein the consumer information management part is configured to manage basic information including personal information of the consumer and financial information of the consumer for the purchase ([0137] customer and order data uploaded to the Order Management system includes customer name, shipping address, invoice number, Product ID number), and
generate the consumer pattern information further using the basic information, and
the financial information includes the payment information for the purchase and the purchase information corresponding to a result of performing charging processing on the purchase decision information ([0093] When Users purchase Products (from either a Store or Customizer) they are redirected to a shopping cart and "Checkout" system (12) which transfers the Order information through the database to the Order Management system (13); [0097] the Company must input into the database the Price to charge the Customer for the Base, which increases as the User customizes the Base; [0137] customer and order data uploaded to the Order Management system includes customer name, invoice number, Product ID number; see [Fig. 36] depicting an invoice, including billing details);
Lipsitz further discloses wherein the basic information includes personal information of the consumer ([0137]), but does not explicitly disclose managing the consumer pattern information; and generating the consumer pattern information using personal information of the consumer.
Papale, on the other hand, discloses managing the consumer pattern information ([0089] the body of knowledge about the user and the products that the user is interested in is used to automatically generate, so called, triggers; [0091] the trigger may be tied to previous user actions, including the user searching for and visiting a product category for printed invitations; [0092] this plurality of triggers may be transformed into specific product options for a custom product using a series of logical operations; [0099] the triggers may be used to select specific attributes and the corresponding attribute values for a customized product that then may be used to digitally generate a customized product which may be displayed in the user interface for the user to view); and
generating the consumer pattern information using personal information of the consumer ([0089] the body of knowledge about the user and the products that the user is interested in is used to automatically generate, so called, triggers; [0091] the trigger may be tied to previous user actions, including the user searching for and visiting a product category for printed invitations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system, as taught by Lipsitz, managing the consumer pattern information; and generating the consumer pattern information using personal information of the consumer, as taught by Papale, for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding Claim 4, Lipsitz and Papale teach the limitations of claim 1.
Lipsitz further discloses wherein the editing part is configured to upload the edited content generated by the editing tool to the content source through the consumer’s selection ([0090] The database generates an overarching front end Customizer (8) where Users can select different features to personalize and customize pre-produced Bases and add them as finished Products to a site wide Store (9). From the Customizer, Users can save their designs; [0107] when the User is satisfied with his/her customer design, he/she may proceed to save the designed product within the database), and
the consumer information management part is configured to store selection information of the selected personalized content and editing information of the edited content resulting from editing ([0090] from the Customizer, Users can save their designs; [0107] when the User is satisfied with his/her customer design, he/she may proceed to save the designed product within the database… see [0090] Users can save their designs to their individual login-protected accounts to revisit later),
provide the selection information and the editing information to the purchase part so that the selection information and the editing information are included in the payment information for the purchase ([0090] from the Customizer, Users can purchase or sell their designs; [0093] When Users purchase Products (from either a Store or Customizer) they are redirected to a shopping cart and "Checkout" system (12) which transfers the Order information through the database to the Order Management system (13) and Accounting system (14); [0111] The User can select from several options in the Store page, including a "Buy it" button), and
receive sale information as the edited content is purchased by another consumer and give a notification through the consumer interface part ([0111] The User can select from several options in the Store page, including a Sell It (11) option, which allows the User to become a Store Owner prompting him/her to login or register for his/her own account and own Sub-Store and Sub-Customizer. Once logged in, the Product can be named and described by the Store Owner and is saved to his/her Sub-Store and available for purchase by other Users; [0130] Orders automatically flow into the Order Management system from the database when Customers purchase Products. Customers are then automatically sent an email with confirmation of a successful transaction and the expected date of arrival for their Orders; [0164] A Store Owner can view the sales they have generated and be rewarded for them).
Regarding Claim 5, Lipsitz and Papale teach the limitations of claim 1.
Lipsitz further discloses a provider interface part configured to provide a provider interface page through the Internet, the provider interface page forming an interface for the content provider to upload the content and collect information ([0088] The managing Company (2) and all Users (3) of the system interact with the database via an Internet connection (4) and a central Company Website (5)… this online interface can be accessed by any electronic device that connects to and displays from the Internet; [0091] In the Store, Users may view, share, save, customize, buy (10) and sell (11) existing finished Products… the database generates filters for Users to easily navigate and search the finished Products in the Store; [0093] Users can sell their own designed finished Products (or other User's finished Products) by activating and personalizing their own Sub-Stores (15) and/or Sub-Customizers (16) through Store Owner Controls (17), consequently deeming them "Store Owners.");
an uploading part configured to provide an uploading tool, the uploading tool uploading the content to the content source in response to an upload request of the content provider ([0098] For each Base, the Operator will upload a file that references images and information of the Models (35) wearing the Base that will be displayed in the Customizer; [0104] Base, Patch and Color images are uploaded in the Create & Edit Base (FIG. 3) screen alongside an appropriate file, such as a CSV file (FIG. 6) that references each image file name and associates it with a field in the database);
a matching information provision part configured to search the plurality of contents of the content source to provide content information corresponding to request information including a condition pre-registered by the content provider ([0097] the database requires information from the Company in order to product the Customizer, including several fields used to filter and differentiate the final Products in the front end Shop navigation, such as the Season that best relates to the Base, the Material of the Base, Colors and Sizes; [0108] a front end Store, which has a grid of Products and two systems for filtering Products… the user may filter by Season, Material, and Color; [0117] the meta tags chose for the Product will allow its automatic listing in search and directory features of any Store; [0156] Unique characteristics of Components can be saved in the system as searchable meta-tags for each Component or Product… see [0110] the tags act as a marketing tool to highlight specific Products when browsing and filtering through a store… Users select items from the filter Product results to match the criteria selected) (Examiner notes that tags used for searching the uploaded content have been interpreted as pre-registered conditions); and
a provider information management part configured to manage and provide the request information of the content provider to the matching information provision part, and manage uploading information of the content ([0098] the Operator will upload a file that references images and information of the Models (35) wearing the Base that will be displayed in the Customizer; [0104] Base, Patch and Color images are uploaded alongside an appropriate file, such as a CSV file (FIG. 6) that references each image file name and associates it with a field in the database; [0110] Items that fall within categories created by the Company are given “Ribbons” (71) which are small graphic tags applied to the thumbnail images in the store, and act as a marketing tool to highlight specific Products when browsing and filtering through a Store), and
sale information corresponding to the purchase information of the consumer ([0124] The Order (116) is a visual way to see the progression of a Customer's purchase of Products (Order) from the time an Order is placed on the website to the time the Order is delivered to the Customer, including the first “Order Approval” point, when a Customer’s Order transaction has been received and successfully approved by the computer system and database).
Regarding Claim 6, Lipsitz and Papale teach the limitations of claim 5.
Lipsitz further discloses a charging part configured to perform charging processing in association with the purchase decision information of the purchase part ([0093] When Users purchase Products (from either a Store or Customizer) they are redirected to a shopping cart and "Checkout" system (12) which transfers the Order information through the database to the Order Management system (13) and Accounting system (14); [0111] the User can select Buy it (10) to add the Product to a shopping cart and continue shopping or go through a Checkout (12) to complete his/her purchase, thereby turning a User into a Customer; [0124] the Order Tracker displays an “Order Approval” status, when a Customer's Order transaction has been received and successfully approved by the computer system and associated software and database),
wherein the charging part is configured to generate the purchase information and the sale information corresponding to the charging processing ([0093] When Users purchase Products (from either a Store or Customizer) they are redirected to a shopping cart and "Checkout" system (12) which transfers the Order information through the database to the Order Management system (13); [0137] Customer and Order data input into the Order Management system includes customer name and invoice number),
provide the purchase information to the consumer information management part ([0127] There are small variations with the display of the Order Tracker depending on who sees it… a customer can see the Order Tracker on an email Invoice; see [Fig. 36] depicting an invoice)), and
provide the sale information to the provider information management part ([0127] There are small variations with the display of the Order Tracker depending on who sees it. For a Store Owner, the Order Tracker displays how many Orders are in each phase of the process (123) for each Product that was purchased from his/her Store; [0129] There are a series of well-defined links that allow the Operator to see how many Orders are in each phase of Production. There is also a place to look up Orders by invoice number).
Regarding Claim 7, Lipsitz and Papale teach the limitations of claim 6.
Lipsitz further discloses wherein the provider information management part is configured to manage the request information ([0098] For each Base, the Operator will upload a file regarding the Base that will be displayed in the Customizer),
the uploading information ([0098] For each Base, the Operator will upload a file regarding the Base that will be displayed in the Customizer; [0104] Base, Patch and Color images are uploaded in the Create & Edit Base (FIG. 3) screen alongside an appropriate file, such as a CSV file (FIG. 6) that references each image file name and associates it with a field in the database),
the sale information ([0093] When Users purchase Products (from either a Store or Customizer) they are redirected to a shopping cart and "Checkout" system (12) which transfers the Order information through the database to the Order Management system (13)),
basic information including personal information of the content provider ([0111] The option to Sell it (11) allows the User to become a Store Owner prompting him/her to login or register for his/her own account and own Sub-Store and Sub-Customizer; [0117] Other controls in the Store Owner Controls include the ability to view all sales (91) through a personal Sub-Store, promote one's Sub-store with links and connections to social media sites (92)), and
financial information of the content provider ([0117] The Store Owner also has Sub-Store settings to configure the payment structure for Sub-Stores that sell on his/her behalf (95)), and
the financial information includes the payment information to be provided to the charging part for the charging processing ([0123] A Store Owner can view his/her sales and get paid--in this case based on a "Commission", (amount of money owed to the Store Owner based on a variable percentage of the total Order value) structure).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S Patent Application No. 2012/0040314 A1 to Rubino – a body ornamentation design, customization and management system allowing a customer to select a body ornamentation design, and organize and maintain records relating to a body ornamentation business.
U.S Patent Application No. 2021/0264467 A1 to Boal – a computer-implemented method for optimizing new item offer parameters based on past consumer activity.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY R DONAHUE whose telephone number is (571)272-5850. The examiner can normally be reac